Friday, April 29, 2011

The U.S. Department of State is proposing a new Biographical Questionnaire for passport applicants. The proposed new Form DS-5513 asks for all addresses since birth; lifetime employment history including employers’ and supervisors names, addresses, and telephone numbers; personal details of all siblings; mother’s address one year prior to your birth; any “religious ceremony” around the time of birth; and a variety of other information. According to the proposed form, “failure to provide the information requested may result in … the denial of your U.S. passport application.”

Sunday, April 24, 2011

AMW correspondent Jon Leiberman spoke with Philomena McCann, the sister of Gerry McCann and the aunt of 4-year-old Madeleine McCann. Philomena confirmed to AMW that Madeleine's mother, Kate, had officially been named a suspect in her daughter's disappearance and was offered a plea deal through her attorney earlier Friday. According to Philomena, if Kate agreed to plead guilty to accidentally killing her daughter, the courts would "be lenient on her." Philomena says Kate's response was, get "stuffed".

Philomena said that though Kate and Gerry were demoralized at first, they are now going to begin "fighting back". Philomena says, "No one is even looking for Madeleine. I've had enough of their reputations being sullied. Kate and Gerry made it uncomfortable for the police the past few months so police just want to cover up their own incompetence by trying to go after Kate and Gerry. " Philomena says she believes that Gerry and Kate will never be formally charged with any crimes because the "evidence is so weak".

Though the shocking news may sound ominous for the McCann family, it may be standard protocol in Portugal. Under Portuguese law, declaring a suspect would indicate that police think the individual may have been involved in the crime but it would not necessarily mean that the suspect would be charged.

In May, Gerry McCann sat down with AMW producers in Washington, D.C., revealing what his family has faced since the abduction of his 4-year-old daughter, and discussing his attempts to find new resources in his quest to bring her home.

More than two months after Madeleine was kidnapped, Gerry visited the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and the International Center for Missing and Exploited Children,learning about some of the techniques they use to track missing kids. Gerry also met with U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez.

Saturday, April 23, 2011

Scott Silverman, Chairman of the Board of VeriChip Corporation, promoting the the Verichiop human tracking device as a way to identify immigrants and guest workers

Silvermann has stated the Verichip "be used for enforcement purposes at the employer level." He added, "We have talked to many people in Washington about using it...."

Columbian President Alvaro Uribe. He reportedly told Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) that he would consider having microchips implanted into Colombian workers before they are permitted to enter the United States to work on a seasonal basis.

At this juncture, an unfortunately common tragedy of modern life will occur: A small child, likely a photogenic toddler, will be murdered or horrifically abused. It will happen in one of the media capitals of the Western world, thereby ensuring non-stop breathless coverage.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

From July 1st every single Australian will be branded with a unique, 1.16 digit identification number courtesy of Medicare Australia in accordance with Kevin Rudd’s new e-health revolution. The stated purpose of this act 2.“is to provide a way of ensuring that an entity that provides, or an individual who receives, healthcare is correctly matched to health information that is created when healthcare is provided.” Understandably it is a simple transition from localized medical records to an online system, that would allow your medical records to be accessed by medical facilities all across Australia.

For many this would seem to be the perfect solution to holiday accidents and prevent any unnecessary delays when facing treatment from an uncommon doctor who would require any past medical records. If a doctor in a different state previously treated you, they would need to determine if any further treatments/medications could cause adverse reactions to a prescription you or your family might currently be on. Having access to your usual doctors detailed medical reports, anywhere in the country, might just be a life saver. But is there more to it than meets the eye? There is indeed a surreptitious plan to set up the ground work for this system to progress seamlessly to implantable RFID microchips. All that would be required is a simple distribution of the PositiveID microchip and the necessary RFID scanners into the medical infrastructure – the software side would already be functioning at full steam.

3.“The Australian healthcare sector is a complex of public and private interests, hospital and community facilities, GP’s, laboratories, health funds, professional associations, special interest groups and individual consumers”. The introduction of this system would aim to revolutionize the way medical records are accessed and updated, ensuring every time it is accessed by a medical professional, the information is up to date and accurate. 4.Privacy advocates have lambasted the proposed bill quoting medical record privacy breaches, in 2007-2008 there were 234 serious accounts of this occurring yet 160 of these resulted in an emailed warning or counseling. If the Unique patient identification number was to go ahead, Australian Privacy Foundation chair Roger Clarke said “The situation will be many hundreds of times worse, as the HI database will ultimately be accessed by more than 600,000 medical providers and organizations”.

Knowing of the obvious security flaws that are inherent with a system of this scale, why does the Rudd government choose to bulldoze it into legislation? Could this in fact be the Hegelian dialectic at work? It could very well be a future road map that would lead to the more ‘secure’ method of accessing medical records via RFID implants as scores of complaints flood the media regarding security breaches and invasions of ‘privacy’. Scott R. Silverman, chairman and CEO of PositiveID claims 5.“In addition to helping consumers protect themselves from identity theft as it pertains to credit fraud, we are also focused on combating the growing problem of medical identity theft, which affects 7 percent of identity theft victims”. How noble of Scott.

Lets move to the hardware side of things, as we already have established that Medicare is providing the 16 digit number. Why 16-digits? Introducing the PositiveID implantable RFID microchip. The microchip itself 6.contains only a 16-digit number that when scanned with a hand held reader, connects to a secure online database. The database houses the patient’s identification information and personal health record data. The Council of Australian Governments even state themselves that 7.“The identifiers are an important building block for the future introduction of a patient-controlled Individual Electronic Health Record“. Scott R. Silverman states, on behalf of PositiveID, 8.“we put consumers in charge of their own health information through a robust, patient-controlled interface.” Interesting indeed.

9.It has been established already that IBM has seed funded PositiveID since inception, would it come as any surprise to you that 10.Medicare relies on IBM for its technology infrastructure and has just paid $189 million for a one-year extension on a services contract? Of course not. This is the most disturbing element, the very people designing and maintaining the system currently in use in Australia, are also the ones behind the PositiveID RFID microchip for humans.

Currently Microsoft and Google both have an e-health record management service.

Microsoft’s product is ‘MS HealthVault’, Google’s is simply ‘Google Health’. 11.Both of these services are fully interoperable with PositiveID’s RFID microchip. 12.Microsoft has already made a submission to the national health and hospitals reform commission (NHHRC) and proposed an electronic health record system for the improvement of Australia’s healthcare. 13.Google isn’t far behind in the race either, with CEO Eric Schmidt stating that he “hopes to deliver Google Health to Australia by the end of the year”.

Staying true to the science of gradualism, we are having an information cage slowly erected around us and we won’t know until it is too late to do anything about it.

Maybe the implantable RFID microchips are coming sooner rather than later, we do know that they will be introduced for the purpose of cost efficiency and ‘reliability’ of patient identification, perhaps a failed e-health system could provide the perfect chaos to accommodate an implantable RFID solution.

What we wont be told is that it will simply be a ‘plug in’ upgrade to our existing infrastructure, meaning a rapid deployment nation wide.

To some money minded bureaucratic sell outs, this is an extremely easy system to sell to an uneducated public.

Australians have already researched the ‘benefits’ of implantable microchips in a published article titled 14.“Lend me your arms: the use and implications of humancentric RFID”. The article suggests that social and ethical concerns “plague the technology” yet goes on to imply that “Initial adoption of the invasive technology has met with some success but any real assessment of the industry is prejudiced by the commercial monopoly of the VeriChip Corporation [now known as PositiveID]”. “Security and convenience are generic wants” and “Care-related humancentric RFID devices provide unparalleled portability for medical records.”

To all the disbelievers that think the human microchipping agenda is light years away, think again, this article was published in 2006.

I’m going to be keeping my eye on the Rudd governments new health plan, in particular the 15.$436 million dollars that has been proposed to deal with the rising number of diabetics – just how much of this money is going to be used for a feasibility analysis of PositiveID’s iGlucose system? 16.“The iGlucose system is a standalone, self-contained unit that will automatically query a diabetic’s data-capable glucometer for blood glucose data and send that data via encrypted SMS text messaging to an online database.“ The machine is well oiled and vigilance is needed, we are dealing with a company that has no qualms when it comes to 17.micro chipping Alzheimer patients with 18.cancer causing RFID microchips.

There is going to be a huge, vulnerable market in the form of diabetic patients and with the 19.US government and now the 20.Australian government both trying to tackle the expanding financial burden that this disease places on both respective economies. You don’t have to look too far for an ‘easy’ and ‘cost effective’ solution, especially with PositiveID ready to jump at any opportunity it can to ‘help’.

NOTE: Legislation has been presented to Senators within Australia to prevent the mandatory implantation of humans, and it is sitting on their desks currently awaiting further action. Please contact your representatives and encourage them to introduce this into the senate and have it passed into law. For more information on the legislation itself there is a website found at http://www.wethepeoplewillnotbechipped.com/action/ that explains the process you will need to follow including a letter template and fact sheet.

Sainsbury’s have begun a trial which monitors the shopping habits of customers. Currently only a voluntary system, customers are asked if they would like to participate when they enter the flagship superstore in Crayford, Kent. They are then given a specially equipped trolley and a handheld scanner, which they use while selecting items to purchase. The trolley contains a GPS device which tracks movement around the store. The information gathered is then downloaded after the goods have been paid for. Sainsbury’s are encouraging customers to enter the trial by bribing them with vouchers and discounts. The company hopes to use the information to help plan decisions on the layout of stores and the positioning of products.

Although this seems relatively benign, it has some potentially worrying consequences. If successful, the system may stop being voluntary, and be introduced throughout all stores. Currently, customers can choose whether to use a loyalty card which tracks purchases, and opt-out if they prefer not to. This system will give the company even more information about consumer habits, allowing more targeted, potentially unwanted marketing to be sent out to shoppers. It will also keep records of any purchases from the in-store pharmacy, which may be private and confidential.

If the “trolley tracker” system is to be rolled out throughout England, it should remain completely voluntary, to allow customers shopping habits to be anonymous and avoid receiving additional unwanted marketing.

Whitehall officials insisted the data is not stored as fingerprints but unique number streams derived from the prints, rendering it useless to anyone except the school using the system.However the claims were disputed by campaigners who oppose the use of biometric data in schools. They also said that school computers are not secure enough to keep the data safe from hackers.

An investigation earlier this year found that 285 schools have already introduced fingerprint scanners.

They are used for a range of purposes including tracking children during the day to ensure they are not playing truant.

However, less than a fifth had first sought parental consent, according to a survey by the Liberal Democrats.

LibDem MP Greg Mulholland said: "It is highly disappointing and unsatisfactory that there remains no legal requirement for parental consent before a child's biometric data is collected."This is unacceptable. A school would never dream of taking children on a school trip without consent, but collecting their fingerprints is not subject to the same safeguards."

He said: "It is very weak as it neither requires schools to seek parental consent nor recognises the serious issues at stake with schools fingerprinting children simply for administrative convenience."

David Coulter, from the pressure group Leave Them Kids Alone, added that allowing schools to take children's fingerprints without consent was an "infringement of liberty".

He said: "These systems store fingerprint templates, which are used by the police. It leaves children open to identity fraud later on."

Polls by lobby groups suggest as many as 3,500 schools have bought the necessary equipment.

Many heads are said to have been waiting for the official guidance before bringing in the systems, fearing they could be breaching data protection law.

This states that while schools should notify parents they are taking biometric data, they do not have to seek formal consent.

And if pupils are old enough - thought to be around the age of 12 - do not even have to notify parents. They can comply with the law simply by informing the child.

Campaigners wanted ministers to force schools to ensure they had written permission from parents before taking children's fingerprints.

But the guidance merely told heads it was "good practice" to be "clear and open" when introducing biometric technology.

It advises schools to make contingency plans if parents object, for example by keeping a smartcard service running alongside fingerprint scanners.

However there is no requirement for them to do this.

Parents' only option if they are unhappy with the changes is to complain to the Information Commissioner.

Schools Minister Jim Knight insisted: "Biometric data is increasingly being used in schools. This guidance advises schools to fully involve parents in any decision to introduce this new technology.

"I want parents to be fully engaged with every aspect of their children's education - this is at the heart of today's guidance.

"I back every headteacher's right and professional judgment to choose technology to improve their day-to-day running - but it is plain common sense for them to talk to parents about this."

The guidance, issued by the Governmentfunded British Education Communications and Technology Agency, known as Becta, said schools must not pass on the information to outside bodies and should destroy it as soon as the pupil leaves.

However Liberty, the civil rights group, said: "The police have the right to get into any database, private or public."

The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) have claimed that the much-needed controls on biometric systems and CCTV in schools are a “Luddite Solution”.

The new legislation will require the written permission of both parents, plus any other person with parental responsibility for a child. Without this, schools will be unable to use a biometric system on children.

"ASCL completely agrees that parents should have a say in whether their children take part in biometric systems in schools, and they should have the right to opt out if they have concerns or are opposed in principle.”

“However, if the bill goes through, the hoops that schools and colleges will need to go through to use these systems will be completely disproportional. The reality is that in the next few years, we will be using finger recognition to log onto our laptops. This is the future and it is already in one in every three secondary schools. To enact this legislation is a Luddite reaction and a huge backward step."

A spokesman for the Department for Education (DfE) said:

"We've got no problem with heads using the latest biometrics to speed up lunch queues or registration - that's their choice. The bottom line is that parents should have the right to opt their children out if they are concerned about its use. Biometrics is always a sensitive issue - the onus should be on schools to explain and persuade parents of these systems' merits. You can't assume families will just go along with whatever a head says, when it comes to using and storing their children's personal data. It's common sense that alternative systems are available for those who those that want it."

Biostore Solutions claim that in the schools which use biometrics, 99.8% of parents have no objection to it being used on their child.

This seems an extremely suspicious statistic, especially considering it comes from a company with a huge conflict of interest.

In fact, the statistic does not come from a survey of parents; instead it is based on the number of pupils who refused to take part in the system. Most pupils will have been subjected to a huge amount of pressure to accept the system from teachers who they are taught to respect.

Without this legislation, schools will install hugely intrusive biometric systems and CCTV cameras to monitor the movement of children without the permission of parents, who may not even know about the systems.

The government is right to make these changes, and should ignore the complaints of the ASCL.

Regular visitors to the Big Brother Watch blog will be well aware of our opposition to the Intercept Modernisation Programme - a vast database which will log details of all 'phone calls, text messages and e-mails sent in the United Kingdom. More on our position can be found here.

Syed Kamall, a Conservative MEP for London, has tabled a question to the European Commission examining the legal basis for the scheme and its conformance with EU law.

In his question, Syed asked whether 1) the UK's Intercept Modernisation Programme as described in the Strategic Defence Review would be compatible with EU data protection laws and 2) what steps the Commission intended to take if it was incompatible with EU statues.

The Commission's response was as follows:

"The Commission underlines the importance of the protection of the security of citizens in conjunction with a robust protection of civil liberties.

"The ePrivacy Directive 2002/58/EC protects the right to privacy in the electronic communications sector. It provides that Member States may adopt legislative measures to restrict the scope of the rights, including those concerning confidentiality of communications, when such restriction constitutes a necessary, appropriate and proportionate measure within a democratic society to safeguard, inter alia, public security.

"The European Commission is aware that in April 2009 the UK Government consulted on a number of options for maintaining the vital capability of public authorities to use communications data to protect the public.

"In October 2010 the UK Government set out in the Strategic Defence and Security Review its intention to continue to build on an existing programme of work to preserve the ability of law enforcement, security and intelligence agencies to obtain communications data and to intercept communications within the appropriate legal framework with its inherent safeguards and oversight.

"The Commission has been informed that the United Kingdom intends to legislate to ensure that it can avail of adequate communications capabilities and that the legislative approach will be compatible with the UK governments approach towards civil liberties. Details of this legislation would be announced in the UK Parliament in due course.

"The Commission will follow this process closely to ensure that the legislation that will be proposed will be consistent with the obligations of the UK under EU law, including that relating to data protection."

Sunday, April 17, 2011

“There were English elements here, incognito. We were targeted by surveillance and highly controlled by the English authorities”, Tavares de Almeida accused. “And official cooperation was done at the measure of the Anglo-Saxon authorities. For example, when we requested information from England, still during the investigation into the abduction thesis, it never arrived”, he stresses. Ricardo Paiva explained that three British agencies were involved – Leicester Police, MPIA and Scotland Yard – and that many of the diligences were suggested by them.

The parents of Madeleine, missing for nearly a year after disappearing from a holiday resort in Portugal, urged Euro-MPs to put their names to a declaration demanding swift agreement on a US-style "amber alert" system to track abducted youngsters across the continent if necessary.

Kate and Gerry McCann

Mrs McCann told a meeting at the European Parliament in Brussels: "We employ you to support our declaration. Please do not wait for another child and family to suffer as we have".

Mr McCann said: "This is a very simple child alert system with almost no cost implications - who would not support such a system?"

But the couple heard from MEPs today that efforts two years ago to introduce the same missing child plan failed to get sufficient support to succeed.

Today hopes were high that their high-profile loss of Madeleine will help galvanise full backing in the European Parliament and from EU governments.

They explained their continuing pain at Madeleine's disappearance last year. Mrs McCann told MEPs: "I cannot explain just how totally devastating this was. If anyone was wanting to inflict the greatest amount of pain on us then they have done that".

She told reporters the couple would treat the anniversary of Maddie's disppearance as a 'private affair'.

The McCann's discussed the American system during a visit to Washington last month and are convinced EU countries can cooperate in setting up a similar rapid response network.

Mr McCann told MEPs about the high success rate of "Amber Alert", under which nearly 400 abducted children have been successfully recovered in America since 2003 - 80% of them rescued in the crucial first 72 hours after being snatched.

By contrast Europe can only claim limited success in cross-border cooperation, with only a patchwork of partial national monitoring systems.

European data-sharing on child abduction cases is limited, and so far only France and Belgium have introduced comprehensive national child alert systems.

They enable national authorities to flash up electronic missing child information on motorway signboards within 30 minutes of a confirmed case of abduction, as well as triggering bulletins and radio and television stations, interrupting existing programming in the first hours after a case is notified.

Mr McCann said it was now up to European authorities to cooperate in spreading the same system across all EU countries.

He said statistics from America showed that a speedy response was critical in such cases and the system should only be reserved for the most serious abductions, where the authorities believe a child's life is at risk and where detailed information on the child and, hopefully, the abductor can be spread as swiftly as possible.

Then he read out the declaration that the McCann's hope European Parliament will approve.

It calls on all EU governments to introduce a missing child alert system, "the activation of which shall require the immediate supply to relevant news media, order authorities, customs and law enforcement agencies of details of the missing child and the suspected abductors".

They explained their continuing pain at Madeleine's disappearance last year. Mrs McCann told MEPs: "I cannot explain just how totally devastating this was. If anyone was wanting to inflict the greatest amount of pain on us then they have done that".

She also spoke about the fear and pain that her daughter must have been through, adding: "She is four years old".

In February of 2004, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) in the person of Peter Banks, Director of Outreach and Training, first appeared before the Conference of Grand Masters gathered in Washington D.C., giving a heart-felt presentation that asked all in attendance to consider start-up of a child identification program in their jurisdiction. This presentation led to the formation of our standing committee ....Masonic Child Identification Support Committee. Over the past three years we have laid the ground work for collaboration between our two organiztions. The NCMEC is a multi-facided non-profit organization that utilizes "Technology" as the backbone and foundation of its activities to help protect our most vunerable members of society ...CHILDREN... and aid law enforcement in their efforts to find and prosecute those who exploit them.

The power of mums

Mumsnet’s role in the Madeleine McCann advert affair has shown the muscle of parenting forums, says Harriet Lane

Sometimes, I wonder how my mother managed: she only had Dr Spock.

Advancing through pregnancy and motherhood, I’ve had thousands of unknown advisers from whom I’ve picked up tips about breast-feeding and nappies and where to find 100 per cent cotton school gingham dresses, as well as lots of stuff that isn’t really related to motherhood: how to stop my washing machine smelling, how to make Malaysian chicken curry. This is what happens when you develop a Mumsnet habit.

You land on the site accidentally, when you Google “antenatal yoga”: years later, as your children graduate from potties to iPods, you’re still there, snorting with indignation or pleasure, knowing that you should be doing something more conventionally constructive. Online parenting sites are enjoying a boom. UK versions such as bad-mothersclub, netmums and babycentre, not to mention The Times’s own Alpha Mummy blog, are full of energetic communities of parents sharing jokes and pooling information.

But Mumsnet is the daddy.

Founded seven years ago, it shuns those flashing cutie-pie icons that clog up other message boards, and its 300,000 monthly users will not tolerate txtspk or sloppy grammar. People will forever be spatting about Crocs, In The Night Garden, independent schools and Gordon Brown. But beneath the disagreements, there is an understanding that parenting is not an exact science, and we’re all making it up as we go along.

I’m a paid-up subscriber to the slackers’ school of motherhood. My children, 5 and 2, potter in a kitchen crammed with knives and bubbling pans while I sort laundry upstairs.

But on one matter, I am exceedingly vigilant.

As much as I can, I protect my children from stories that I know will distress them. As my daughter is 5, we’ll make do with bedtime stories that amuse, reassure or help to make sense of the world around her: Topsy and Tim Learn to Swim, Five Dolls in a House, Charlotte’s Web.

My husband and I did not tell her about Madeleine McCann.

Our daughter understands that she mustn’t wander off in the street or open the door to strangers. That’s all she needs to know, for now.

Anyway, what lesson can any child draw from the McCanns’ tragedy?

That bad people may take them from their beds while they sleep?

So we have distracted her from posters, hidden papers, switched off the radio, avoided TV news.

On Sunday, because it was raining, I took my daughter to the cinema.

It was only her third trip: Shrek the Third was a U, and the critics all agreed on its overwhelming, stultifying blandness. Perfect. My daughter was sitting up straight, mouth full of popcorn, when the lights went down. As we watched the ads for computer games and people-carriers, I could feel her vaccuuming it all up: the dark, the volume, the extraordinary size of the pictures.

Then the screen was filled with a child’s face.

There was absolutely nothing I could do.

My daughter stopped eating as the story of Madeleine McCann’s abduction was relayed. The word “snatched” was used. My daughter looked up at me, astonished. “Who snatched that little girl?” she asked.

The Find Madeleine ad finished.

An ad for a processed cheese began. Over the clamour, I did my best to explain. A little girl had got lost.

Everyone was looking for her.

Her parents missed her very much. I said it was very sad and everybody hoped she would come home soon. Then Shrek started. It wasn’t scary at all. Afterwards, my daughter didn’t mention the little girl. But at midnight she appeared in our room, sobbing, saying that she’d had a nightmare (an unusual event). The following morning, she asked me: “Have the police found the little girl yet?”

What could I do to stop this ad?

Not much, probably.

I couldn’t blame the McCanns for wanting it to run everywhere: they have a daughter to find, a campaign to fund.

No, the buck stopped with the advertising regulators and the cinemas who allowed it to run before a U feature.

According to recent surveys, British children are among the most anxious and unhappy in the world; small wonder when multiplexes and the British Board of Film Classification feel entitled to pitch the tragedy casually into auditoriums of kids.

So I e-mailed Odeon HQ and submitted a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority (which advises that ads should be socially responsible, and not cause serious or widespread offence or harm).

Then I took my case to the place where I knew it would get proper attention: Mumsnet. As I’d expected, someone was in the same boat. Several people, in fact. The thread grew and grew. Within a few hours, hundreds of posters had added their opinions. Almost all felt as I did.

People posted links to the ASA website, and to the sites of cinemas running the ad in U or PG screenings.

People who’d planned to take their children to the movie said that they’d boycott to avoid the promo.

I forwarded links to the thread – to Odeon, and also to Paramount Pictures, who distributed the film.

I began to hope that the ad might be pulled before the weekend but the ASA explained that should the complaint be upheld, it would still take more than a week to get the ad out of cinemas.

An hour later, a friend in a newsroom rang to say that Odeon was withdrawing the ad from all U and PG screenings. Other chains immediately followed suit.

All in all, it’s a little victory for parents who wish to take responsibility for telling, or not telling, their own children about the worst, most freakish sort of reality.

It’s a little victory for the muscle of Mumsnet.

And yes, it is also good to know that talking to a bunch of strangers on the internet can sometimes be amazingly constructive.

Quote: An unfortunately common tragedy of modern life will occur: A small child, likely a photogenic toddler, will be murdered or horrifically abused. It will happen in one of the media capitals of the Western world, thereby ensuring non-stop breathless coverage.

Perhaps one of the most bizarre aspects of the case of missing Madeleine McCann is that, within days of her disappearance, her parents submitted a trade mark application on her behalf.

Trade marks are typically used to protect commercial property rights, so that, in this bizarre case, it seems that not only was Madeleine perceived as a missing daughter, but also as a future commercial concern, the rights of which were required, to protect the commercial interests of Team McCann.

In a way, it's easy to see why Madeleine's image attracted substantial sums for the interested parties.

Personally the thought of a 'trade mark' for a missing child sounds pretty sick to say the least, and brings a certain disgust at the whole question of her loss.

But what is your opinion

Is it customary to mark a missing child this way?

Was the McCanns' child an exception, whose name needed to be trade marked in the circumstances? Source: ipo.gov.uk

Note: It should be pointed out that the trade mark relates specifically to the activities of the 'Madeleine's Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned' company and not Madeleine McCann herself.

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

In England, two girls (Holly and Jessica) of 10 years old were missing.

Grand search operations were set up, but without any results. Twice, the parents did an appeal on television to the kidnappers, and also David Beckham asked the nation for information. Finally, a jogger found the two dead bodies. Two persons were arrested: a schoolmistress and the handyman of the school.

As a reaction on the event, a mother will insert a microchip into her 11 years old daughter. So it will be possible to find her when she will disappear.

This event was linked with the ‘Dutroux’ affaire, a case of paedophilia a few years ago in Belgium.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Sex pests 'could have hormone injections'

DNA: Face and voice recognition, a DNA database, identity cards and satellite surveillance are all mentioned

Sex offenders could be forced to have hormone injections under radical plans to tackle crime being considered by Downing Street.

Strategists think the injections - effectively the "chemical castration" of sexual predators to suppress their urges - would help prevent attacks.

The controversial proposal is one of a number being looked at by Tony Blair's strategy unit as part of the Prime Minister's policy review.

Other ideas include installing microchips in the mentally ill to monitor their behaviour and sending text messages to parents to warn them a paedophile is at large in their area.

One document, entitled Crime, Justice And Cohesion, says there will have to be "trade-offs" between liberty and security as technology and profiling are used to tackle crime.

Face and voice recognition, a DNA database, identity cards and satellite surveillance are all mentioned.

The paper also highlights how sex offenders in Denmark are given hormone injections, Switzerland prescribes heroin rather than the substitute methadone to addicts and prisoners in Texas are forced to wear pink T-shirts.

Microchips for mentally ill planned in shake-up

Radical measures for tackling crime - ranging from monitoring the behaviour of the mentally ill with radio chips to hormone injections for sex offenders — are to be considered by the Government in a wide-ranging policy review ordered by Tony Blair.

The Prime Minister said yesterday that Labour had to renew its sense of leadership and energy as voters were getting bored with the party after 10 years in power.

He disclosed that he intended to stay in power until at least June to oversee a policy review aimed at ensuring that a "new New Labour" agenda would take the Government into the next election after he had left No 10.

The Cabinet Office published four policy review documents outlining the "big questions and choices" facing society in the next decade.

Cabinet ministers, civil servants and the public, through so-called citizen forums, will be asked to express a view.

Mr Blair asserted his grip on the Government's forward policy agenda as his most likely successor, Gordon Brown, flew to India for an official visit.

The Chancellor has indicated that he will not be bound by the reviews and has blocked Mr Blair's attempts to extend them to his own area of economic policy.

Mr Brown clearly wants a decisive break with the Blair legacy and has already started setting out his priorities, including spending more on education, a less overbearing state and a different style of government.

The policy review programme, which Mr Blair told his monthly Downing Street press conference had generated "real enthusiasm" across government, will be seen as his attempt to ensure that Mr Brown does not backtrack when he takes over.

The Prime Minister dismissed calls from some senior Labour figures to speed up his departure to allow Mr Brown to revitalise the Government before important elections in Scotland and Wales and English councils in May.

He gave the strongest indications yet that he intends to stay in office until the summer.Asked whether he would be at a summit of European Union heads of government in Brussels on June 21, he responded without hesitation: "Of course."

His comments came after David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, told The Daily Telegraph that Labour would have to "defy political gravity" to win a fourth successive election and urged Mr Brown to adopt a "bold" agenda.

Mr Blair said he agreed with Mr Miliband's stark analysis of Labour's mid-term difficulties. But provide the Government did not retreat, "we will

come through this and come through it with the renewed sense of leadership and energy".The options explored in the four documents dealing with public services, the role of the State, energy and the environment, and crime, justice and cohesion, are not Government policy but are intended to "facilitate discussion".

They show how the Government is thinking and its readiness to look at contentious and radical policies that have been tried abroad.

The most controversial paper dealing with law and order acknowledges that there will have to be "trade-offs" between liberty and security as technology and profiling are used to reduce crime.

It acknowledged that two thirds of the public believe crime is rising. People were less confident in the criminal justice system after experiencing it, while re-offending rates remained "stubbornly high".

While burglary had fallen, mugging had risen with the expansion of portable high-tech gadgets, and new crime opportunities such as identity theft and internet crime.

The policy paper confirmed the Government's objective of creating a surveillance society despite Mr Blair's denials of a "Big Brother" state. It said new anti-crime measures include face and voice recognition, a DNA database, identity cards, microchip monitoring and satellite surveillance — and confirmed that Britain has the most public CCTV systems in Europe.It highlighted ways other countries have intervened to tackle crime and drug addiction — though it stresses such ideas "are not presently policies under consideration by the UK Government".

America is said to be "favourably disposed" towards preventing drug addiction through heroin and cocaine vaccination. It is also considering "more sophisticated" monitoring techniques, including a trial of "radio frequency identification chips" for the mentally ill.Options for regulating behaviour include the use of legal restrictions on television beer adverts in use in over half of Europe. In Denmark, sex offenders are given hormone injections, while Dutch police recently sent text messages to warn citizens of an escaped paedophile.

Public sector unions are likely to be alarmed by suggestions of private and voluntary sectors playing an increasing role — such as the 14,000 bail bondsmen and thousands of bounty hunters who ensure defendants get to court.

Human beings may be forced to be 'microchipped' like pet dogs, a shocking official report into the rise of the Big Brother state has warned.

The microchips - which are implanted under the skin - allow the wearer's movements to be tracked and store personal information about them.

They could be used by companies who want to keep tabs on an employee's movements or by Governments who want a foolproof way of identifying their citizens - and storing information about them.

The prospect of 'chip-citizens' - with its terrifying echoes of George Orwell's 'Big Brother' police state in the book 1984 - was raised in an official report for Britain's Information Commissioner Richard Thomas into the spread of surveillance technology.

The report, drawn up by a team of respected academics, claims that Britain is a world-leader in the use of surveillance technology and its citizens the most spied-upon in the free world.It paints a frightening picture of what Britain might be like in ten years time unless steps are taken to regulate the use of CCTV and other spy technologies.

The reports editors Dr David Murakami Wood, managing editor of the journal Surveillance and Society and Dr Kirstie Ball, an Open University lecturer in Organisation Studies, claim that by 2016 our almost every movement, purchase and communication could be monitored by a complex network of interlinking surveillance technologies.

The most contentious prediction is the spread in the use of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology.

The RFID chips - which can be detected and read by radio waves - are already used in new UK passports and are also used the Oyster card system to access the London Transport network.

For the past six years European countries have been using RFID chips to identify pet animals.

Already used in America

However, its use in humans has already been trialled in America, where the chips were implanted in 70 mentally-ill elderly people in order to track their movements.

And earlier this year a security company in Ohio chipped two of its employees to allow them to enter a secure area. The glass-encased chips were planted in the recipients' upper right arms and 'read' by a device similar to a credit card reader.

In their Report on the Surveillance Society, the authors now warn: "The call for everyone to be implanted is now being seriously debated."

The authors also highlight the Government's huge enthusiasm for CCTV, pointing out that during the 1990s the Home Office spent 78 per cent of its crime prevention budget - a total of £500 million - on installing the cameras.

There are now 4.2 million CCTV cameras in Britain and the average Briton is caught on camera an astonishing 300 times every day.

This huge enthusiasm comes despite official Home Office statistics showing that CCTV cameras have 'little effect on crime levels'.

They write: "The surveillance society has come about us without us realising", adding: "Some of it is essential for providing the services we need: health, benefits, education. Some of it is more questionable. Some of it may be unjustified, intrusive and oppressive."

Yesterday Information Commissioner Richard Thomas, whose office is investigating the Post Office, HSBC, NatWest and the Royal Bank of Scotland over claims they dumped sensitive customer details in the street, said: "Many of these schemes are public sector driven, and the individual has no choice over whether or not to take part."

"People are being scrutinised and having their lives tracked, and are not even aware of it."He has also voiced his concern about the consequences of companies, or Government agencies, building up too much personal information about someone.

He said: "It can stigmatise people. I have worries about technology being used to identify classes of people who present some kind of risk to society. And I think there are real anxieties about that."

Yesterday a spokesman for civil liberties campaigners Liberty said: "We have got nothing about these surveillance technologies in themselves, but it is their potential uses about which there are legitimate fears. Unless their uses are regulated properly, people really could find themselves living in a surveillance society.

"There is a rather scary underlying feeling that people may worry that these microchips are less about being a human being than becoming a barcoded product."